This is the city: Los Angeles, California. I work here. I'm an ex-mayor. Los Angeles is a magnet for people from all over the world. Some of them run for public office. Inevitably some of them stray from the golden rule and rule for those that have the gold. That's when I go to work. My name is Yorty. I'm a dead pol.

Monday, September 21, 2009

Radio station KPCC 89.3 FM might be the subject of an FCC complaint or investigation in the near future. Just minutes ago, host Larry Mantle and KPCC decided to violate the FCC regulations regarding "equal time" for all candidates involved in an election. Only the "Big 3" big money Machine Candidates for the City Council seat in CD 2 were allowed to go on the air with Larry.

Larry Mantle did a good job, regardless of the poor choice to only speak to these three candidates.

The first few minutes were the standard self-congratulatory speeches and boilerplate campaign jibber-jabber.

Things got spicy when Larry Mantle pointed out some dicey subject areas and let the Big 3 candidates go at each other.

Paul and Tamar started bashing Chris for her big money donations from outside CD 2.

Tamar also went off on Chris about her support for SB 1818 while involved with the CCA, yet flip-flopping on the campaign trail and saying she never supported it.

Essel was not good with her response, brushing them both off by saying "I find the whole attack on me disingenuous."

Mantle started to ruin Tamars day by bringing up the LAUSD flier controversy and asking her if she didn't do it to "enhance her candidacy."

"The Ethics Commission told us we couldn't use it on anything other than LAUSD things," she responded. Tamar kind of stumbled around on this answer, but generally denied any wrong doing. Paul and Chris were clearly not convinced.

Essel slammed into Paul for paying for his hack political consultants for this CD 2 race out of his State Assembly money funds. Krekorian was stunned by this accusation.

Paul was blindsided by this attack. "I would like to respond to this bizarre statement about 'slush funds' by Miss Essel. She shows a reckless disregard for the truth," he added, in lawyer-like escapist talk.

Krekorian stumbled and bumbled around, unable to deny the payments ...but eventually excused himself by saying they were payments for "old debts." Terrible response by Paul. Best thing about this show was that all three of them eventually looked bad. Their rivals pointed out their flaws for all to see.

HIGHLIGHT OF THE SHOW: Michael McCuecalled into the show! I was ready for him to unload on Larry, but unfortunately it sounded like Michael was driving and his cell phone connection wasn't very good and you couldn't hear him too well. He did get out the phrase " Excluding the grassroots candidates.." quite clearly.

Mantle made some pathetic excuse about "reaching critical mass" with other candidates.

Here's a hot Mayor Sam tip for Larry Mantle....

Larry, you might want to walk down the hall and have a chat with a very classy lady named Patt Morrison who works the at KPCC. (She's kind of famous...I think you might already know her.)

WAY, way back in March 2009 - when TEN Candidates were running for the office of Mayor of Los Angeles, Patt set aside a separate day for each candidate and interviewed them each for about 15 minutes.

I know it's complicated. Ask Patt to explain it to you. She is a sweet lady and has a lot of patience.

It should surprise no one that Larry Mantle would limit the program to the mayor's three candidates. Larry still has the vapors over "the first Latino mayor of Los Angeles since 1872." (Even Roderick is over that one.)

Joseph --Do you have a citation to a regulation or statute for that assertion?

This strikes me as a violation of the FCC equal time rules. The station is not covering a private event that excluded candidates. Rather, this station -- itself funded with public money -- has decided to conduct a forum from which it excluded most candidates.

This is not my legal field, and I haven't researched it, but this coverage of just three candidates does not pass the "smell" test.

The equal-time rule specifies that U.S. radio and television broadcast stations must provide an equivalent opportunity to any opposing political candidates who request it. This means, for example that if a station gives one free minute to a candidate on the prime time, it must do the same for another candidate.However, there are four exceptions: if the air-time was in a documentary, bona fide news interview, scheduled newscast or an on-the-spot news event the equal-time rule is not valid.

Walter we don't care what you have to say. You actually thought at one point that you were going to get more votes than Villaragosa in a run off. You didn't even force a run off. And you were not able to make your initiative on the ballot. You hot air emmissions are adding to global warming. Please stick to your own turf where you do not turn people off. I know a lot of people think you are where it is at. Cater to those people. We just don't like you around here.

Let me remind all you folks...1/ When Arnold ran for Governor, NONE of his films were aired on Television in California. (Also there were issues over a painting on the side of a building seen from the 101 near Universal.

2/ When Fred Thompson ran for President NONE of his LAW AND ORDER episodes ran on NBC or in Rerun on TNT.

Phil, what is dirty and what "violates" a law--and the interview law was inserted by Congress in the Eisenhower years--are two different matters. I just wanted to clarify: Larry Mantle is not obliged to extend equal time by any law. Whether it's "dirty" not to do so is another matter, and one I hope other candidates will consider.

One of the things political consultants kept telling me when you guys were running for Mayor is that a media organization needs to spell out a policy that will determine what might trigger a candidate appearance or coverage. The rules can be arbitrary, but they should be spelled out, whether it's based on polling, finance, or even media buys. It's up to a broadcaster's listeners to hold them accountable: if these candidates think it's a big enough deal, they're free denounce KPCC for excluding them.

Of our local public broadcasters, KCRW has been going downhill for about a decade, and it's all because Ruth Seymour bought into people who make their living airing dirty media laundry rather than covering actual news and who can be depended on to pimp for locals in power, whomever they may be. KPCC hasn't been going down so fast because Mantle is far more politically agile and far less patronizing. But it does appear that Mantle's become a little more gunshy than he used to be.

And to follow up on that point, speaking of pimping for locals in power: nobody has gone soft more quickly than Patt Morrison. I can't believe that I just heard that Nahai canceled his appearance onher show ("too busy dealing with the crisis") and Patt scratched his back by not even mentioning him and apologized for him. Yes, KPCC has gone soft in the past few months. And it's really time for people to call them out on it.

Who in the world would believe a law school dropout who quotes from WIKIPEDIA and doesn't bother to do his homework.

NO SURPRISE that Phil couldn't handle FIRST YEAR work at Whittier Law School.

Whatever the case, I DO value what Walter has to say. Hey, Zuma Dogg said he wasn't coming back to city hall after losing the mayor's race, and that's cool. Walter can say he's done with this blog, but if he has something to say, I'm willing to listen.

HEY PHIL: WALTER FINISHED LAW SCHOOL, PASSED THE BAR, AND IS PROBABALY EARNING A BIT MORE THAN YOU DO AS A CHARACTER AT SIX FLAGS.

Votes that went to Phil or Zuma did not "cost" me anything. Any vote for any candidate other than Villaraigosa helped increase the odds of a run-off. You understand that, right?

As for the candidates' credentials, I do indeed believe I am far more qualified than Zuma or Phil to serve as Mayor, based on objective measures of qualifications, in particular, education and professional licensing. If I sincerely believed anyone else running was more qualified, believe me, I would have been HAPPY to write 'em a check and have all my free time to myself.

I do fault the local media for lumping me together with the other candidates. I had been excluded from debates in 2005 on the grounds that I had not qualified for matching funds. So this time, I raised enough to qualify for matching funds. Yet the media treated me exactly the same as the candidates who did not raise any money. That was indeed frustrating.

Am I everyone's cup of tea? Nope. But I think it's fair to say my supporters and I did an outstanding job. Villaraigosa spent 15 times more money, but got only twice as many votes.

Anyhow, I'm never running for anything again -- except maybe a bus or a flight. But I hope more people -- like Mary, and the other business owners running for office -- will step up to the plate.

And seriously, if anyone wants to buy a nice house in Carthay Circle for $1 million contact me. I would love to get out while the getting is good.

As for "insulting" Phil or Zuma, I don't recall "insulting" them at all. I pointed out the differences in their qualifications and mine. All candidates were not created equal; never are. I was the best candidate. Deal with it. Or not. I really don't care. I'd just like to see someone good elected tomorrow.

KPCC is a public radio station and therefore funded by we the people. And since it is funded by us (though the most of the public radio audience usually leans left) they should have included all of the candidates, not just the big 3.